Cap and Trade
www.CapAndTrade.net

What is "Cap and Trade"?

"Cap and Trade" was originally implemented as a result of the 1990 Clean Air Act, where Cap and Trade was first implemented - and to a very huge success in reducing Sulfur Dioxide Emissions - the cause of "acid rain."

In the proposed Cap and Trade program as it applies to capping the amount of  Greenhouse Gas Emissions - the cap limits the amounts of global warming emissions - Greenhouse Gas Emissions - and more specifically, the amount of Carbon Dioxide Emissions - and gradually decreases the amounts of Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Carbon Dioxide Emissions that a country - or region, may produce.

Cap and Trade allows the marketplace to reduce these Greenhouse Gas Emissions in a market-driven manner that provides for as smooth, efficient and orderly transition to "carbon free energy" and "pollution free power" as possible.

Therefore, a “cap” is the legal limit on the quantity of Greenhouse Gas Emissions that a country or region may emit each year and the “trade” means that companies may trade among themselves the permission – (permits) – to emit Greenhouse Gas Emissions.

A successful Cap and Trade market for capping Greenhouse Gas Emissions will enable those who can reduce pollution cheaply and inexpensively - to earn a return on their Greenhouse Gas Emissions reductions by the investment they made to reduce these emissions.... by selling extra allowances or permits in the marketplace.  The Cap and Trade program, simultaneously, allows those companies who can’t reduce their Greenhouse Gas Emissions as inexpensively, to purchase those allowances or permits at a lower cost than the cost of investing in the equipment or technologies that would have reduced their own Greenhouse Gas Emissions.

The Cap and Trade program permits all companies and participants to meet the total Greenhouse Gas Emissions cap in a very efficient and cost-effective manner. And it gives all those that do generate Greenhouse Gas Emissions economic incentives to find the least-cost solutions for reducing their Greenhouse Gas Emissions.

_______________________________________________________

Our "Integrated" CHP Systems (Cogeneration and Trigeneration) Plants 
Have Very  High Efficiencies, Low Fuel Costs & Low Emissions

The Effective Heat Rate is Approximately 
4100 btu/kW & System Efficiency is 92% Plant.

The CHP System below is Rated at 900 kW and Features:
(2) Natural Gas Engines @ 450 kW each on one Skid with Optional 
Selective Catalytic Reduction system that removes Nitrogen Oxides to "non-detect."

Our CHP Systems may be the best solution for your company's economic and environmental sustainability as we "upgrade" natural gas to clean power with our clean power generation solutions.

Our Emissions Abatement solutions reduce Nitrogen Oxides to "non-detect" which means our Trigeneration energy systems can be installed and operated in most EPA non-attainment regions!

_______________________________________________________

______________________________________________________

Cap and Trade
www.CapAndTrade.net

_______________________________________________________

What are the Real Reasons Behind the Need to Pass Cap and Trade? 
Could the Reasons be:

1.  To Regulate & Tax the 6 Man-made Greenhouse Gas Emissions for Stopping Climate Change and/or Global Warming?

2.  Cap and Trade is a "Scam" and all About Profit and Power and Lining the Pockets of Those That Support Cap and Trade so its' Supporters Can Line THEIR Pockets with $10 Trillion/year?

Cap and Trade Requires Careful Debate - the $10 Trillion/year that Cap and Trade Generates Every Year is larger than the annual U.S. Economy.

Where does the $10 Trillion/year go from the proposed Cap and Trade (tax)?  

Who are the People and Companies that will 
Profit from the proposed Cap and Trade (tax)?

According to many sources, "Cap and Trade" is a "$10 Trillion/year Market"
and the Biggest Fraud and Heist in American History, led by:

Richard Sandor - Chicago Climate Exchange
Maurice Strong - Chicago Climate Exchange
Al Gore - Generation Investment Management 
Goldman Sachs
Joyce Foundation
Joel Rogers - Apollo Alliance
AFL-CIO
SEIU
NBC/General Electric
Shore Bank
Van Jones - a radical left-wing extremist and avowed Communist
George Soros - perverted extremist and radical New World Order advocate
Soros Fund Management
The Open Society Institute
Media Matters for America

_______________________________________________________

TRUTH & FACTS ABOUT "CAP AND TRADE"

• America and many Americans are BROKE and unemployed. 

• America is in Debt to the Amount of >$16 Trillion. 

• As America is presently BROKE,  and over 15 million Americans are UNEMPLOYED, will Cap and Trade, If Passed by Congress, Cause America to Go Bankrupt, Like Socialist Europe?

• Nobody Wants Pollution.

• Everyone Wants "Clean" Power.

• All Real Americans Want OFF Foreign Fossil Fuels, ESPECIALLY Those Fossil Fuels from muslim/middle-east Countries.

Let's Do This Right in 2 steps!

1.  Get ALL of the Climate Scientists to Agree that Greenhouse Gas Emissions ARE the Reasons Behind Climate Change / Global Warming... Which May Still Be 20 - 30 Years off, according to many scientists and experts that have not sold-out to political agendas and unproven science.

2.  Stop buying foreign oil!  Produce America's own domestic oil and gas AND renewable energy technologies.

_______________________________________________________

More About Cap and Trade

According to the U.S. EPA, Cap and Trade is an environmental policy tool that delivers results with a mandatory cap on emissions while providing emission sources flexibility in how they comply. Successful Cap and Trade programs provide strict environmental accountability without inhibiting economic growth, and reward innovation, efficiency, and early action.

Cap and Trade is a policy approach for controlling large amounts of emissions from a group of sources. The approach first sets an overall cap, or maximum amount of emissions per compliance period, for all sources under the program. The cap is chosen in order to achieve a desired environmental effect. Authorizations to emit in the form of emission allowances are then allocated to affected sources, and the total number of allowances cannot exceed the cap. Individual control requirements are not specified for sources; instead, sources report all emissions and then surrender the equivalent number of allowances at the end of the compliance period.

Allowance trading enables sources to design their own compliance strategy based on their individual circumstances while still achieving the overall emissions reductions required by the cap. Affected units can tailor their compliance plans to each source. Compliance strategies in well-designed cap and trade programs require no prior approval, allowing sources to respond quickly to market conditions and government regulators to remain focused on results. Sources must also accurately measure and report all emissions in a timely manner to guarantee that the overall cap is achieved.

When Is Cap and Trade Effective?

In EPA’s experience, Cap and Trade programs have proven highly successful in the context for which they are best suited: reducing emissions on a regional or larger scale from multiple sources that exhibit a range of control costs. While achieving significant reductions on a regional scale, cap and trade programs can deliver substantial air quality improvements. As effective as these programs are, however, they may not be the solution to every problem. For example, eliminating localized concentrations of pollution is not their primary purpose.

The Cap and Trade approach is best used when the environmental and/or public health concern occurs over a relatively large area; a significant number of sources are responsible for the problem; the cost of controls varies from source to source; and emissions can be consistently and accurately measured. Under the right circumstances, cap and trade programs have proven extremely effective, providing substantial emission reductions, complete accountability and unprecedented data quality and access. Existing Cap and Trade programs – the Acid Rain Program and the NOx Budget Program – have the force of federal and state standards behind them, including national health-based air quality standards. This ensures that local public health needs are met in conjunction with achievement of regional or national emission reductions.

Cap and Trade Program Design

Three features critical to designing and implementing environmentally effective and economically efficient trading programs are 1) the cap on emissions, 2) accountability, and 3) simplicity of design and operation.

Cap on Emissions

The cap on emissions is the central component and element of an effective and efficient cap and trade program. A mandatory cap on emissions is critical to protect public health and the environment and to sustain that protection into the future. The cap also serves to provide stability and predictability to the allowance trading market. 

The remarkable efficiency and reduced costs of a cap and trade program should not overshadow the purpose of the cap – which is to yield public health and environmental results.

As an example that was very successful of a Cap and Trade program, SO2 emissions have been reduced dramatically under the AcidRain Program. Early reductions under the first phase of the program were banked to provide a gradual transition into the more stringent second phase.

Source: www.epa.gov/airmarkets

Accountability

The accurate measurement and reporting of emissions is critical, along with the rigorous and consistent enforcement of penalties for fraud or noncompliance.

Also critical is transparency, such as public access to source-level emissions and allowance data.

The coupling of stringent monitoring and reporting requirements and the power of the Internet makes it possible for EPA to provide access to complete, unrestricted data on trading, emissions, and compliance. This promotes public confidence in the environmental integrity of the program and business confidence in the financial integrity of the allowance market. It also provides an additional level of scrutiny to verify enforcement and encourage compliance. 

Accountability requires ongoing evaluation of the cap and trade program to ensure that it is making progress toward achievement of its environmental goal.

Simplicity

Rules should be clear and easily enforced. Markets function better and transaction costs are lower when rules are simple and easily understood by all participants. Moreover, the environment is more likely to be protected when rules are clear and consistently enforced. To the greatest extent possible, simplicity should be applied to all elements of the program, including applicability thresholds (determining which sources are affected), trading rules, reporting requirements and penalty assessments. Program operation for both emission sources and regulating authorities is more certain, more effective, and less costly and time-consuming if the rules are not overly complex and burdensome.

A well-designed Cap and Trade program delivers the following benefits:

• Greater environmental protection at lower cost

• Broad regional reductions, facilitating state efforts to address local impacts

• Early reductions, a result of allowance banking and market incentives

• Environmental integrity and transparent operations and results

• Fewer administrative costs to government and industry

• Efficiency and innovation incentives

• Incentives for doing better and consequences for doing worse

• Accounting for all emissions

• Partnership with existing requirements to ensure protection of the local population and environment.

Continued Accountability

As the Cap and Trade mechanism is applied to new environmental problems, the EPA understands the importance of ongoing assessment to ensure that environmental and public health goals are met.

The remarkable efficiency and reduced costs of a cap and trade program should not overshadow the purpose of the cap – that is, to yield public health and environmental results. Whether the cap has been set at a level adequate to achieve the desired public health and environmental protections is an issue that warrants study and evaluation. 

As previously mentioned, both the Acid Rain Program and the NOx Budget Cap and Trade programs have been highly effective in reducing these specific emissions.

Though long-term environmental monitoring has affirmed the programs’ effectiveness, studies have shown that further reductions in emissions beyond the current caps are necessary to protect public health and the environment.

_______________________________________________________

What are Greenhouse Gas Emissions?

Greenhouse Gas Emissions are those greenhouse gases that allow sunlight to enter the atmosphere freely and contribute to the greenhouse effect, which many believe is the cause of global warming. There are natural and man-made greenhouse gas emissions.  The primary greenhouse gases thought to be major contributors to global warming are; carbon dioxide emissions (CO2), methane & biomethane emissions (CH 4), chlorofluorocarbons, and nitrogen oxides (N2O).  Not included, but should be included according to some climate scientists is water vapor.

The primary sources of greenhouse gas emissions from manmade sources include; fossil-fueled power plants such as natural gas power plants and coal fired power plants. Other sources of greenhouse gas emissions linked to manmade causes include  internal combustion engines (fueled by gasoline and petroleum diesel) and deforestation.

Many people don't realize that as much as 25% of  per cent of the carbon dioxide emissions are naturally absorbed by the ocean and another 25% of the carbon dioxide emissions are absorbed by our biosphere, such as trees, plants, soil, etc.  This leaves about 50% of the carbon dioxide emissions that are not absorbed and remaining in our atmosphere. As previously stated, carbon dioxide emissions are linked primarily to the burning of fossil fuels (power plants, cars, trucks, etc.) and deforestation.

Greenhouse gas emissions have been on the increase ever since the dawn of the industrial revolution.

What Are Greenhouse Gases?

Many chemical compounds found in the Earth’s atmosphere act as “greenhouse gases.” These gases allow sunlight to enter the atmosphere freely. When sunlight strikes the Earth’s surface, some of it is reflected back towards space as infrared radiation (heat). Greenhouse gases absorb this infrared radiation and trap the heat in the atmosphere. Over time, the amount of energy sent from the sun to the Earth’s surface should be about the same as the amount of energy radiated back into space, leaving the temperature of the Earth’s surface roughly constant.

Many gases exhibit these “greenhouse” properties. Some of them occur in nature (water vapor, carbon dioxide, methane, and nitrous oxide), while others are exclusively human-made (like gases used for aerosols).

_______________________________________________________

What are Carbon Dioxide Emissions?

According to the EPA, Carbon Dioxide Emissions, or "Carbon Emissions" or simply "CO2," are generated in a number of ways. Carbon Dioxide Emissions are produced naturally through the carbon cycle and through human activities like the burning of fossil fuels.

Natural sources of CO2 occur within the carbon cycle where billions of tons of atmospheric CO2 are removed from the atmosphere by oceans and growing plants, also known as ‘sinks,’ and are emitted back into the atmosphere annually through natural processes also known as ‘sources.’ When in balance, the total carbon dioxide emissions and removals from the entire carbon cycle are roughly equal.

Since the Industrial Revolution in the 1700’s, human activities, such as the burning of oil, coal and gas, and deforestation, have increased CO2 concentrations in the atmosphere. In 2005, global atmospheric concentrations of CO2 were 35% higher than they were before the Industrial Revolution.

Carbon Dioxide Emissions are responsible for about 80% of the problems related to Greenhouse Gas Emissions. 

Carbon Dioxide Emissions and carbon dioxide are one of the six chemicals

• methane and Biomethane

• nitrous oxide

• hydrofluorocarbons 

• perfluorocarbons 

• sulfur hexafluoride

and all six chemicals are planned to be significantly reduced via the global agreements under the Kyoto Protocol and new legislation in the U.S. under the pending "Cap and Trade" regulations in an effort to prevent climate change. 

What are Chlorofluorocarbons?

Chlorfluorocarbons are a family of non-reactive, nonflamable gases and volatile liquids.

Understanding the names

• Halocarbons: Fluorine, chlorine and bromine belong to a chemical family called the halogens. When attached to carbon they form a group of compounds called 'halocarbons". The smaller halocarbons turn into a gas quite easily and are the prime-suspects in ozone-depletion.
  

• Chlorfluorocarbons abreviated CFC, are the major category of man-made halocarbons. Each different CFC is identified by a numbering system which describes the CFC structure.

  In the hundreds place, the number represents the number of carbons, less one.

  In the tens place the number represents the number of hydrogens, plus one.

  In the ones place the number represents the number of fluorines.

  For example CFC-113 has two carbons, no hydrogens and three fluorines. CFC-12 has one carbon, no hydrogen and two fluorines.

The CFC-ozone link

The non-reactivity of CFC's, so desirable to industry, allows them to drift for years in the environment until they eventually reach the stratosphere. High in the stratosphere, intense UV solar radiation severs chlorines off of the CFC's, and it is these unattached chlorines that are able to catalytically convert ozone molecules into oxygen molecules.

Different CFC's require different amounts of time to remove from the stratosphere, times ranging from 50 to over 200 years; so while it is cheering to see that the growth-rate of Chlorfluorocarbons in the atmosphere is starting to drop (Elkins et.al._Nature_364:1993), the impact of Chlorfluorocarbons on stratospheric ozone will continue well into the 22nd century.

CFC's differ widely in their stabilities and in how effectively they breakup ozone. A rating system called an Ozone Depletition Potential , ODP, is used to compare compounds by how much damage they may cause to environmental ozone. The ODP is arrived at by dividing the cumulative Ozone depletion of the compound by the ozone depletion caused by the release of an equal amount of CFC-12, one of the earliest CFC's. For example methyl chloride, the major naturally-made source of stratospheric chlorine, has a ODP of less than 0.10. This means that if equal amounts of methyl chloride and CFC-12 were releaced into the stratosphere, the methyl chloride would degrade 1/10th as much ozone as the CFC-12 . Halon 1301, a compound that contains bromine as well as chlorine, has an ODP of 10 so it is 10 times more destructive than CFC-12.

Proposed replacements for Chlorfluorocarbons

As government pressure to ban Chlorfluorocarbons increases, chemical companies are scrambling to find replacements that are effective, nontoxic and have a low ODP.  Industry is currently proposing to substitute HCFC's (Hydro-chloro-fluorcarbons) for CFC's because they are nearly as effective and nontoxic as CFC's but with ODP's that are 1/10th to 1/50th that of CFC-11. A big reason for their lower ODP is that it is predicted, based on lab experiments, that HCFC's will break-up in the troposphere and therefore not be able to transport chlorine into the stratosphere. Industry acknowledges that HCFC's are merely stopgap measures in the ongoing search for replacement, but many environmental groups are concerned that HCFC's may relieve pressure on industry to fund research for long-term replacements.

Most commonly used Chlorfluorocarbons

The size of the square reflects the relative contribution of each compound to CFC caused ozone depletion (UNEPdata, 1990). The times are the lefetimes of the compound in the atmosphere before it is broken down and/or removed.

How Can We Decrease Greenhouse Gas Emissions?

Greenhouse gas emissions can be reduced by switching from fossil fuels to renewable energy technologies, such as solar energy systems, and upgrading brown buildings to Net Zero Energy Buildings.

Why Are Atmospheric Levels of Greenhouse Gas Emissions Increasing?

Levels of several important greenhouse gases have increased by about 25 percent since large-scale industrialization began around 150 years ago (Figure 1). During the past 20 years, about three-quarters of human-made carbon dioxide emissions were from burning fossil fuels.

Figure 1. Trends in Atmospheric Concentrations and Anthropogenic Emissions of Carbon Dioxide

Concentrations of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere are naturally regulated by numerous processes collectively known as the “carbon cycle” (Figure 2). The movement (“flux”) of carbon between the atmosphere and the land and oceans is dominated by natural processes, such as plant photosynthesis. While these natural processes can absorb some of the net 6.1 billion metric tons of anthropogenic carbon dioxide emissions produced each year (measured in carbon equivalent terms), an estimated 3.2 billion metric tons is added to the atmosphere annually. The Earth’s positive imbalance between emissions and absorption results in the continuing growth in greenhouse gases in the atmosphere.

Figure 2. Global Carbon Cycle (Billion Metric Tons Carbon)

What Effect Do Greenhouse Gas Emissions Have on Climate Change?

Given the natural variability of the Earth’s climate, it is difficult to determine the extent of change that humans cause. In computer-based models, rising concentrations of greenhouse gases generally produce an increase in the average temperature of the Earth. Rising temperatures may, in turn, produce changes in weather, sea levels, and land use patterns, commonly referred to as “climate change.”

Assessments generally suggest that the Earth’s climate has warmed over the past century and that human activity affecting the atmosphere is likely an important driving factor. A National Research Council study dated May 2001 stated, “Greenhouse gases are accumulating in Earth’s atmosphere as a result of human activities, causing surface air temperatures and sub-surface ocean temperatures to rise. Temperatures are, in fact, rising. The changes observed over the last several decades are likely mostly due to human activities, but we cannot rule out that some significant part of these changes is also a reflection of natural variability.”

However, there is uncertainty in how the climate system varies naturally and reacts to emissions of greenhouse gases. Making progress in reducing uncertainties in projections of future climate will require better awareness and understanding of the buildup of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere and the behavior of the climate system.

What Are the Sources of Greenhouse Gas Emissions?

In the U.S., our greenhouse gas emissions come mostly from energy use. These are driven largely by economic growth, fuel used for electricity generation, and weather patterns affecting heating and cooling needs. Energy-related carbon dioxide emissions, resulting from petroleum and natural gas, represent 82 percent of total U.S. human-made greenhouse gas emissions (Figure 3). The connection between energy use and carbon dioxide emissions is explored in the box on the reverse side (Figure 4).

Figure 3. U.S. Anthropogenic Greenhouse Gas Emissions by Gas, 2001 (Million Metric Tons of Carbon Equivalent)  

Figure 4. U.S. Primary Energy Consumption and Carbon Dioxide Emissions, 2001

Another greenhouse gas, Biomethane, comes from landfills, coal mines, oil and gas operations, and agriculture; it represents 9 percent of total emissions. Nitrogen oxides (5 percent of total emissions), meanwhile, is emitted from burning fossil fuels and through the use of certain fertilizers and industrial processes. Human-made gases (2 percent of total emissions) are released as byproducts of industrial processes and through leakage.

What Is the Prospect for Future Carbon Dioxide Emissions?

World carbon dioxide emissions are expected to increase by 1.9 percent annually between 2001 and 2025 (Figure 5). Much of the increase in these emissions is expected to occur in the developing world where emerging economies, such as China and India, fuel economic development with fossil energy. Developing countries’ emissions are expected to grow above the world average at 2.7 percent annually between 2001 and 2025; and surpass emissions of industrialized countries near 2018.

Figure 5. World Carbon Dioxide Emissions by Region, 2001-2025
(Million Metric Tons of Carbon Equivalent)

The U.S. produces about 25 percent of global carbon dioxide emissions from burning fossil fuels; primarily because our economy is the largest in the world and we meet 85 percent of our energy needs through burning fossil fuels. The U.S. is projected to lower its carbon intensity by 25 percent from 2001 to 2025, and remain below the world average (Figure 6).

Figure 6. Carbon Intensity by Region, 2001-2025
(Metric Tons of Carbon Equivalent per Million $1997)

Energy Production and Carbon Dioxide Emissions

For over one hundred years, energy and power production have been generated around the world through the burning of fossil fuels, including;  fuel oil, coal, diesel, and natural gas.  Over the past decade, environmental science and research has discovered and linked global warming, and global climate change to the carbon dioxide emissions from the combustion of fossil fuels.  This has placed an increased need to reduce energy consumption and discover more environmentally friendly fuel sources.

________________________________________________________________________

EPA Moves Closer To Regulating Carbon Dioxide Emissions 
and All Other Leading Greenhouse Gas Emissions

April 18, 2009
By: Webmaster 
www.CarbonDioxideEmissions.com
www.CarbonEmissions.com
www.GreenhouseGasEmissions.com

WASHINGTON — In a major reversal of years of government policy regarding Greenhouse Gas Emissions, the Environmental Protection Agency today proposed regulating Greenhouse Gas Emissions to combat and reverse global warming and climate change.

"In both magnitude and probability, climate change is an enormous problem" said E.P.A's Administrator Lisa Jackson in their 130 page report on Greenhouse Gas Emissions. "This finding confirms that greenhouse gas pollution is a serious problem now and for future generations. Fortunately, it follows [US President Barack H. Obama's] call for a low-carbon economy and strong leadership in Congress on clean energy and climate legislation. Greenhouse Gas Emissions and greenhouse gas pollution problems have a solution, one that will create millions of green jobs and end our country's dependence on foreign oil," according to Jackson. 

Jackson said this report found that projected levels of Greenhouse Gas Emissions "endanger the public health and welfare of current and future generations."  The finding came two years after the Supreme Court ruled the EPA had the authority to regulate Greenhouse Gas Emissions under the Clean Air Act.

"Renewable Energy Technologies such as; Anaerobic Digesters, Biomethane, Concentrating Solar Power, Geothermal Power Plants are "carbon neutral energy" technologies, and generate no new Greenhouse Gas Emissions.  Power generated from Biomass Gasification power plants, are "carbon negative energy" solutions which actually remove carbon dioxide emissions from the atmosphere, according to the Founder and Chairman of the Institute for Climate Solutions, and the Renewable Energy Institute's Mont Goodell. 

For more information, see the Greenhouse Gas Emissions website at:  www.GreenhouseGasEmissions.com.

_______________________________________________________

Carbon Dioxide Emissions
www.CarbonDioxideEmissions.com

Carbon Dioxide Emissions Consulting Services, Carbon Dioxide Credits, Emissions Trading, Engineering, Feasibility Studies and Renewable Energy Solutions for Reducing Carbon Emissions & Greenhouse Gas Emissions

We provide "Carbon Free Energy" and "Pollution Free Power" solutions. In addition, our clients then generate additional revenue streams in the form of a Renewable Energy Credit, as well as high quality Carbon Dioxide Credits, Carbon Emissions Credits, or Greenhouse Gas Credits.

We Help Companies, Cities and the Agricultural Community Reduce Their Carbon Emissions. 581 - Email:  info@CarbonDioxideEmissions.com  for more information.

How we make and distribute electricity is changing! 

The electric power generation, transmission and distribution system (the electric "grid") is changing and evolving from the electric grid of the 19th and 20th centuries, which was inefficient, highly-polluting, very expensive and “dumb.”  

The "old" way of generating and distributing energy resembles this slide:

According to Monty Goodell, Founder and Chairman of the Renewable Energy Institute, "our increased dependence and reliance on foreign energy supplies represents a Clear and Present Danger to our national security, our economy, and the lives and livelihood of every American. Energy - including the energy we use from imported fossil fuels, is the very "lifeblood" of the American economy as it is for every industrialized country.  An economy dies without it's lifeblood of energy. This Clear and Present Danger we face is far more serious than the problems related to greenhouse gas emissions.  And while greenhouse gas emissions are very serious issue, in the long-term, pales in comparison to America's vital national security interests and America's economic stability in the short term.  For this reason alone, America needs to transition away from its addiction to foreign energy supplies. And America's abundant renewable energy resources such as the energy we receive from the sun, and renewable energy technologies such as concentrated solar power (CSP) plants - can supply 100% of America's power requirements with a concentrating solar power plant measuring 75 miles by 75 miles, located in the Southwest U.S.  By generating America's power from concentrating solar power plants, America resolves its' short-term Clear and Present Danger as it relates to importing its energy from foreign countries, and the long-term problems relating to greenhouse gas emissions."

Continuing, Mr. Goodell states that "too many Americans have forgotten what happened to us in 1973, when the Arabs and OPEC brought the United States economy to a screeching halt during the OPEC Oil Embargo.  This happened because they (mainly the country of Saudi Arabia) disagreed with our foreign policy and is the reason why they "turned off the tap" of our need for their oil supplies. When Saudi Arabia and OPEC stopped the vital flow of oil to our country in 1973, they caused an "oil shock" that severely and negatively impacted our economy. 

Mr. Goodell's question for us to ponder is, "do these countries who sell us 60% of our daily energy requirements, like us and our foreign policy, or might they leverage our addiction to their fossil fuels, and turn off the tap to make us adjust or revise our foreign policy??  Like any addict, America's foreign policy may be held hostage to its addiction, and in this case, our addiction to foreign oil, may over-ride our national interests."

Have American's forgotten the gas shortages and long lines at 
their gas stations to get gas during the Arab Oil Embargo of 1973? 

"Apparently so."  Mr. Goodell states that "in 1973, America was 'addicted' and 'over the barrel' of foreign oil to the amount of 40%.  Forty percent of our energy 'needs' in 1973 came from countries - many of which didn't like us then, and I'm afraid, many of them still don't.  The difference between 1973 and today - is that today we receive 50% MORE foreign oil now than we did in 1973.  And now we know about the problems relating to greenhouse gas emissions that we didn't know then.  America needs to change course, and change course now, in terms of its' energy supplies and how we keep America's economy strong, without the threat of being held hostage to a middle-east tyrant or regime, that could once again, turn on us, and turn off our supply of foreign oil." 

Remember ????

"Sadly," Monty Goodell continues, " most Americans have forgotten the long lines of people waiting in their cars - lined up and waiting for gasoline at their nearby gas station, with lines that were many blocks long.  And, after waiting 4-5 hours, many even waiting overnight in many places, to finally take their turn to fill up their car with gasoline, only to find that the gas station had run out of gas." 

"Let me Repeat.... That was 1973 when we imported 40% of our daily energy requirements in the form of crude oil from overseas, and from foreign countries - and many of these from countries that don't like us.

Today, over 35 years later, America has yet to learn the lesson.  We cannot continue our reliance on energy from foreign countries that supply us with 60% of the crude oil that our refineries use as a feedstock for producing gasoline and diesel fuel for our cars and trucks comes from overseas. 

America is "over the barrel" and it's not our barrel, but the barrels of oil that we are addicted by and owned by other countries.  Why have we not learned the lessons we needed to learn in 1973 when we were cut-off from the vital energy supplies we need? 

Countries like China, are growing rapidly, and have an insatiable need for crude oil. China, with their booming economy, is increasingly growing in its clout and control over international supplies of crude oil - whether they do this through their ability to buy as much oil as they need on a daily basis, or whether they simply but American drilling rigs, technology, and explore and produce oil and gas from their own fields. China, is buying large amounts of oil for their country, and causing upward pricing on declining supplies. What happens if Russia, with all of their oil and natural gas, along with China and Venezuela, with or without the help of OPEC, decided to NOT sell oil to us????

To be sure, greenhouse gas emissions are a problem, and to some, greenhouse gas emissions are also a Clear and Present Danger, but not to the extent that it presents an imminent Clear and Present Danger. 

America's reliance for 60% of our energy "needs" coming from foreign suppliers is un-acceptable.

The "driver" to get America to begin reducing and eliminating fossil fuel use should be our nation's national security and the welfare and safety of its citizens. And this can all begin with developing and investing in our own renewable energy resources and renewable energy technologies, let's start by putting solar on every rooftop that has a clear and unobstructed view of the Southern sky. See www.RooftopPV.com  or  www.DistributedPV.com  for more information.  Let's create incentives begin with adopting a national "Feed In Tariff" as Germany did in 1990. 

America, we simply do NOT have the luxury of time on our hands.  We need to end our dependence and reliance on foreign fossil fuels, especially from countries that don't like us! We need to rapidly begin expanding renewable energy resources and renewable energy technologies from our vast and abundant renewable energy resources, such as; solar, solar energy systems, solar cogeneration, solar trigeneration, "solar on every roof," waste to energy, waste to fuel, biomass gasification, B100 Biodiesel, Biomethane, Synthesis Gas, geothermal, E100 Ethanol (from sugar cane and NOT from corn), and wind, where it makes economic sense."   

For more information, call or email: